Converted

Well, I believe this is a bug and should be looked into by the CMBN team. I seriously doubt mortar teams would be so far off, even if there was some visibility issues. The FO would definitely know that the rounds weren't hitting in the area and call back to the mortar team to adjust.
It is a bug and needs to be addressed. I will play some more to see if I can figure out what is causing it.

I have played Road to Berlin now twice in a row, in two back-to-back games, spotter had rounds falling on the target and mortars shifted to off the map fire. This also occurred between fire missions in the same game. I think this is definitely a bug OR we need to understand how the mortar team can be that far off from target.
I can see rounds missing by 100 yds, but this was half the map away. Since others are noticing it too, I would say it is not just my games either.
In the first game, I lost because I ran out of ammo and could not destroy the gun, in the second game, I was more sensitive to it and started watching my mortar targeting. From the HQ perspective, the mortar was targeted properly, however, from the mortar teams perspective, the target aim was way off the map.
Yes I heard that coordinating mortars in WW2 was challenging, but this is a little too far off. To mitigate this situation, until it is looked at by Battlefront, I recommend you check your mortars aim during spotting and fire mode and if they are off track, cancel the mission, move the mortar, and try again. I also moved my spotter and this seemed to help. The other thing I did notice is that it doesn't happen if you choose area fire. It only appeared to be a problem with Point fire.
Sounds suspicious to me :-)
I did finally win the Road to Berlin on Warrior with a total victory once I figure out how to use the mortar teams.
Good Hunting everyone.

Mortar firing all over the map, not even close to where HQ target is, repeatedly happens across multiple fire missions. I don't believe mortar team can be that far off.
This needs to be fixed or mortars are useless.

Runs great on my Win7 64 machine with a Nvidia 460 card, quad 6600 and 8GB ram. Runs very fast and smooth.
Pros:
Great looking scenery and models. Best I've seen in any comparable games.
Performs well
A lot of sounds and commentary from the troops
I like RT, so this is nice also.
Sound effects are imerrsive and enjoyable
Troop movement in general is very realistic, combat so far appears to be modeled well
The Strat AI appears to be intelligent
It's fun to play and I'll buy it
Cons:
Some of the animations need tweaking, not sure if this is the demo (mortar teams seem to do some weird things).
Vehicle movement needs micromanagement. I'm kind of surprised by this. Instead of reversing to a location and then turning and moving, tanks will slowly rotate and get stuck on narrow roads when they are directed to move in the opposite direction.
hotkeys don't work depending on which submenu you are on, this is strange and makes RT difficult
Overall, hotkey labeling is un-intuitive - I hope this can be reassigned.
It's still CMSF with a WW2 slant. Artillery sounds like modern radio communication and some of the issues from CFSF have not been corrected.
I would absolutely play this over the CMx1 games, so it is a big step forward from that generation. I look forward to the engine improvements as Steve and his team improve on CMx2 in the coming months and years.

I have a Win64 8GB machine with a NVIDIA 460 and it works great. Game loads fast and graphics are smooth and fast. Probably video drivers causing your problem, make sure you have latest audio and video drivers.

Come'on Rich. This rant is quite childish and it reminds me of my son when he was two and throwing a tantrum. Rich, the AI poke was in good fun and you should have just laughed it off. We all know that there is a big difference in fixing a bug where planes run out of fuel vs the all-seeing AI issue you are so determined to keep on the table.
Next time one of us pokes fun at you, just respond by saying. "eh - good one" or come back with something comical like - "maybe we should have had nasa write the AI" or just let it pass. I responded because of your negative response and the fact that you keep the fire burning. Let it go out and either play along or let the quips go by un-responded to. You take this board far too seriously.

I have spent many a day playing EOS and when I compare the money spent and the time I've received value for, it was easily worth the money compared to other interests I have
I go to the early show to watch movies and at $6 per movie, my $45 in movies gets me about 8 movies or about 16 hrs of entertainment time. I've easily gotten better than 60 hrs out of EOS in the past year which is about 4 times as much as I get for my voracious moving watching habit.
I also spent $30 on the Avatar bluray and while I enjoy watching that movie, I doubt I will ever watch it enough to justify the cost of the bluray in comparison to what I spent on EOS and the value received.
Brit, I still think you should have done an EOS2 and developed some missions and campaigns.
Best of luck and as long as you keep improving the game, I'll keep downloading the updates and playing.

Point noted. Sorry to keep this thread going and I rest my case. The AI is a very difficult thing to improve or Brit would have already enhanced it. I believe the game will remain as it is unless Brit releases the code and others find the time to improve it.

Ok, well, I guess I need to keep posting here until this diatribe fizzles.
Rich, the fact is that even if Brit rewrote the AI using FOW, you would not be happy with it. Given our current technology, it is almost impossible to develop an AI that can compete with a human because the developers can not allocate enough resources to solve the problem. In order to make the game playable, shortcuts need to be taken to keep the timeframe small enough to keep you interested. So, asking for the impossible is a little unrealistic.
How do I know this, I have studied AI for many years as a Computer Scientist and I can tell you this is not an easy problem to solve. Humans have a tremendous number of senses and parallel brain functions that current computers are not able to compete with. Just because Big Blue can beat a human at chess, doesn't mean that Brit can create an AI for a complex wargame. Chess is much easier to program an AI for than EOS, I guarantee that.
Brit should not spend any more of his valuable time on this game other than to fix those bugs he has time for. The AI is not a bug, it is an architecture and design issue and it works as designed.
As for open sourcing the AI, well, I'm a developer and I would consider looking at and enhancing the code if Brit decides to publish it. However, I won't make any promises to make it any better. I have my time constraints as well, but I would be willing to look at it and maybe get together with others to see if we can improve it.
Rich, no one disagrees with your issues about the AI, we just disagree with you beating up Brit about it and your argumentative nature on the boards.
Let's see what Brit has to say about open sourcing the AI and maybe we can help improve it. By the way, the AI in any computer game is one of the most complex pieces of the game.
Cheers to Brit for giving us this game and for supporting it so well.

Rich,
You need to let this go. Brit has supported EOS way longer than he should have given the amount of money he has been making. He has a new job and probably a new life away from EOS now. Sorry that you aren't happy with the game, but get over it. The AI is as good as it is going to be. If you don't like the game, quit playing it.
Brit may continue to support the game, but not like he has been in the past. Find another place to complain. We're all tired of it.

I doubt Brit is going to reply to this nonsense. Rich, you raised a good question, now let's see what Brit has to say about this. The rest of this diatribe is noise. Hope you guys are enjoying yourself.

Brit,
You've learned a lot from your first endeavor into gaming and while EOS may not have met your expectations for wealth and fame, it is a fun game and many of us have gotten our moneys worth.
It is unfortunate that as you were ready to release your game we had entered into one of the worst economic times in our generation. As you have indicated in other threads, you have to make money to survive and I believe that there are several paths you might pursue to leverage your investment in EOS.
1. Partner with another developer(s) and work on EOS2. Doing this on your own is very difficult and may allow you to work on it part-time while you recover from your debt.
2. Go to work with a game developer and leverage your skills and bring us more new games.
3. Develop EOS scenarios and/or a Campaign. I still believe this is one area where EOS missed a golden opportunity. You might be able to manage this part time.
4. Improve the AI. This is not a trivial issue, but in today's market place, it is the difference between a game people will replay or shelve. Unfortunately, EOS is too easy to beat and replay value is limited. Even if you cheat and use scripting or other helpers to portray a more intelligent AI, the improved perception issue is huge. You may need help here. Solicit it and reap the rewards. Don't fix it as EOS1, incorporate it into EOS2. Look at all the games out there that reinvent themselves in the second release.
5. Leverage your knowledge to teach others, write a book, help other developers. You have accomplished something that very few game developers achieve. A finished product that you made money on. You may not be rich, but you are successful.
6. Revel in your success, go back to work as a developer and pay off your bills. Come back stronger and nail the next one when the economy is better. You have to know that part of your lackluster sales are due to a very sick economy for software. If you look at the number of discounted games out there right now, it is truly a tragedy. Don't let this time period dissuade you from the future. There will be better opportunities for EOS2 in the coming years. I hope you will consider this.
Don't forget that marketing a game is way more important than the game technology. If you are not a marketeer, find someone who can help you. Apple was a technology company, now they are a marketing company. Look at their stock now. How you present your game will dictate how it sells. Yes, it still has to be a good game, but the more pizazz you have around it the more interest you will have.
Best of luck and thanks for all of your support and updates. I still play EOS and it continues to surprise me at times and is still a great way to burn a cold Sunday afternoon.